Cathy McLeod

[Public Safety, October 7th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal public safety critic continues to advocate for his soft on crime agenda. Yesterday, he went one step further and called the failed prison farm program one of the most successful programs for rehabilitation. We could not disagree more.

Here are the facts: Over the last five years, less than 1% of offenders released into the community actually found work in the agricultural sector, and this 1% success rate cost taxpayers over $4 million every year.

When will the member for Ajax—Pickering put public safety first? Does he think rehabilitation does not require ensuring marketable job skills post-incarceration? Does he think law-abiding Canadians do not deserve to feel safe in their homes and streets? After all, this is the member who proudly mused about reducing criminal sentences.

It has never been clearer that the Liberals and the public safety critic are not in it for law-abiding Canadians; they are just in it for themselves.

[Sisters in Spirit, October 4th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, the Sisters in Spirit vigils commemorate missing and murdered aboriginal women, women from all walks of life and from all across Canada.

The Government of Canada is committed to ensuring that all women in Canada, including aboriginal women, are safe and secure, regardless of the community in which they live. Ending this type of violence and bringing to justice those who have committed crimes is a shared responsibility of all levels of government.

This is a serious matter, which affects a far greater number than the women who have gone missing and their families. We must all take steps to ensure that aboriginal women, and indeed all women, are better protected from violence in its many forms.

Our government will continue to work in partnership with provincial and territorial governments, aboriginal people and other stakeholders to develop more effective and appropriate solutions to this pressing matter.

[Justice, September 29th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday's decision by the Ontario Superior Court on the Bedford prostitution challenge struck down key components of our anti-prostitution laws and was deeply troubling to a number of Canadians.

Could the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada please update the House on what action our government is prepared to take on this very important issue?

[Health Care System, September 23rd, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to stand and summarize the debate on my Motion No. 513.

I want to thank my colleagues on both sides of the House who have contributed to this debate in a very important way. I will speak to some of the specific issues and comments that they made a bit later.

We have to recognize that the role of the federal government is guided by our legislation and our Constitution and it is a delicate balance in terms of not stepping on provincial jurisdiction.

As I listened to the Liberals, I heard that I was too cold. As I listened to the Bloc, I heard that I was too hot. I would like to suggest that our Conservative government has it just about right in terms of how we approach health care.

As a practitioner and also as someone who has studied international systems for many years, I have seen public-public systems, public-private systems, all sorts of combinations of health care systems. Regardless of the systems and regardless of the country, and some perhaps do a better job than us and some definitely do not do nearly as well as us, the element in my motion talks to something that would improve outcomes for Canadians and increase opportunities for sustainability. We need to focus on these important elements.

I noted the comments made by my colleague from Vancouver South. In response to that both the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health and the parliamentary secretary for official languages have spoken clearly to the importance that we are putting on many of these elements and the considerable investment of federal government dollars. I believe the message has been heard clearly that it truly is important.

For my colleague from the Bloc, I would love to fall off my chair one day when that member stands to vote with me on this motion. If I had more than five minutes to summarize, I could actually convince that member of how important it is. We can all benefit, whether it is decreased sodium in soup, which is across the country, whether it is support for technology through Health Infoway - Canada, Quebeckers and all Canadians would benefit. I would love to see that member stand and support the motion.

In response to the comments by my NDP colleagues, I appreciate the large lens that they put to this issue. Health care and the health care system is about more than just these elements, but this motion is somewhat focused. I do appreciate their expanded scope, but the motion is very specific.

Imagine a day in terms of technological developments where thoracic surgeons are seeing patients in remote areas, where we have hospitals without walls and patients who have chronic disease can get their lab results directly on their iPad, taking responsibility for monitoring their own conditions in partnership with their health care team.

Imagine a day when we have utilized all our resources to the full scope of their practice, whether it be the physician assistant with the army, the dental therapist working with our aboriginal communities, the community health representatives, the nurses working in primary care, a strong, solid primary health care team.

Most important are strategies for prevention and healthy living. That will be a huge step toward a sustainable health care system.

This general discussion is very timely with the expiry of the accord in 2014. These areas of focus all have an important role to play in the future of a sustainable health care system.

I ask for the support of all members of the House on this important motion.

[Business of Supply, June 17th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I listened with great interest to the work that has already been done in the standing committee. Would my colleague talk about having an additional committee doing the same thing? What kind of resources does that take and what kind of staffing does it need? During these times, when we are trying to be very respectful of taxpayer dollars, could the member talk about what the impact of this committee might be?

[Justice, June 16th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, the NDP refused to support the speedy passage of Bill C-23, meaning that notorious criminals would remain eligible for pardons.

Neither victims nor law-abiding Canadians think that it is acceptable for notorious criminals to be pardoned while the opposition plays political games in Ottawa.

Would the Minister of Public Safety update this House on this critical issue?

[Justice, June 15th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, earlier today the Minister of Public Safety tabled the bill to end early release and increase offender accountability. As Canadians know, this government is committed to protecting the safety and security of all Canadians.

The bill would give victims a greater voice and would ensure that the protection of society principle is the guiding principle of corrections and conditional release.

Could the Minister of Public Safety explain how this bill would continue our government's strong commitment to the safety and protection of our communities?

[Multiple Sclerosis, June 14th, 2010]

Mr. Chair, the member told a story that touched us all. I think we can all relate, through family, friends, or others, to the story the member told. That is the story we certainly want to hear.

We have a doctor who is very well respected in Kamloops. He wrote a significant article in the newspaper, because this is so prevalent among the MS sufferers in our community. In the article, he talked about the disease in a way people could understand. He talked about the promise of the treatment and said that he is optimistic. However, he also added caution. He is really worried. We have processes in place to approve of treatments and to move treatments into the mainstream.

Yes, let us move as fast as we can, but let us not give up on appropriately ensuring that what we are doing is safe and that we are doing something that is really positive for health and safety.

We heard earlier from my colleague. His doctor was giving his patients a similar message. Perhaps the member could reflect on those doctors who express that bit of concern that yes, we need to move fast, but we have to make sure that we have a good process.

[Multiple Sclerosis, June 14th, 2010]

Madam Chair, since I started on the health committee, I certainly know that my colleague has an incredible enthusiasm for both neurological disease and the neurological subcommittee. I know there is a whole group in this House that has a great passion for that subject.

I, unfortunately, have not been part of that subcommittee, so I am wondering if the member could share with me a little bit about the dynamics in terms of Dr. McDonald. He was able to do the procedures for awhile and now he can no longer do them at all. Could the member perhaps share the dynamics again because I did not hear that clearly?

[Multiple Sclerosis, June 14th, 2010]

Madam Chair, I certainly appreciated the comments I just heard, and I appreciated the comments I heard a little earlier from the Bloc member.

Certainly, the chamber acknowledges the importance of research and moving forward in a very rapid way in terms of ensuring that we have some appropriate research done. The member heard very clearly from the Bloc, and we certainly know, that the Canada Health Act requires provincial and territorial health insurance plans to provide medically necessary hospital and physician services. We also have the responsibility the provinces have in terms of determining what they cover and what they are going to do.

Has the member talked to the province in which she lives about what it is doing and where it is going to move this issue forward?